bug#56353: closed (sbcl-2.2.6 build fail)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 03 Jul 2022 10:09:10 +0000
with message-id <87y1xapks4.fsf@kitej>
and subject line Re: bug#56353: sbcl-2.2.6 build fail
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #56353,
regarding sbcl-2.2.6 build fail
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
56353: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=56353
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> sbcl-2.2.6 build fail
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sat, 02 Jul 2022 17:29:22 +0800
>
>
>
>
> Hi, guix:
>
> the command:
> guix package -u
>
> log:
> /gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv wird erstellt …
> - „build-doc“-Phasebuilder for 
> `/gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv' failed with exit 
> code 1
> Erstellung von /gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv 
> fehlgeschlagen
> Das Erstellungsprotokoll kann unter 
> „/var/log/guix/drvs/6l/q7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv.bz2“ 
> eingesehen werden.
> guix package: Fehler: build of
> `/gnu/store/6lq7dfdfzrlp24lmhj95fcnvkr2mrqfz-sbcl-2.2.6.drv' failed
>
> This is what I had right. If you need more, please let me know.
>
> best regards
> wxie
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---

--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#56353: sbcl-2.2.6 build fail Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 10:09:10 +0000

Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv@posteo.net> skribis:

> bokr@bokr.com skribis:
>
>> I wonder what running this at the time builds failed would have shown:
>>
>> #/usr/bin/bash
>> # ~/bin/top-1-sans-hilights -- single snap of top without highlight escapes 
>> (no top opt for that??)
>> top -n 1 | \
>> sed -e 's:[\r][^\r]*[\r]\+::g' -e 's:[\x07\r]::g' -e 's:.\x08::g' \
>>     -e 's:\x1B\[[^a-zA-Z]*[a-zA-Z]\x0f*::g' \
>>     -e 's:\xe2\x80\x98:":g' -e 's:\xe2\x80\x99:":g'
>>
>> (no guarantees on my hack to get rid of the highlighting escapes
>> and utf8->ascii quote subst :)
>> (top seems to assume even -n 1 output is always going to interactive dest)
>>
>> Anyway, wondering: Could memory and CPU loading at the time
>> have triggered the build failure?
>
> I don't think so. It looks like the SB-SIMD optional module only gets
> built on x86_64 CPUs supporting AVX2 instructions. The Bayfront and
> Harbourfront machines don't, and this is why the 'build-doc' phase fails
> when trying to load SB-SIMD to compile its documentation.
>
> I'm testing a patch disabling SB-SIMD, and I'll push it if all goes
> well.

Patch pushed as e0d2f8164e6a1c15fdcae6f7dadb05c0c9e25352.
Closing.

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

--- End Message ---